ChatGPT agrees with you too much. Type these before your prompt: TRUTHMODE: brutally honest REDTEAM: plays devil's advocate SOCRATES: teaches through questions LINDYMODE: uses proven methods, not hype 10 codes + hundreds more:

Kimi K3 Scan Uncovers Critical Vulnerabilities Across Bitcoin Open-Source Projects Bitcoin Red Team researcher calle said that after using Kimi K3 for two weeks, the team identified numerous critical and high-severity vulnerabilities across Bitcoin open-source projects, with maintainers validating the findings. The team has completed a basic scan of nearly the entire Bitcoin open-source ecosystem, with many of the easier-to-find vulnerabilities already discovered. Calle said AI is significantly lowering the cost of vulnerability discovery and verification, making unmaintained projects increasingly risky. He argued that projects will need to establish their own AI-driven security audit pipelines, while the speed of response to vulnerability reports has become an important indicator of project health.

AI-Infra-Guard is an open-source, self-hosted red-teaming platform for AI builders. • Scan AI infrastructure for fingerprints and CVEs • Audit MCP servers and Agent Skills • Red-team Agent workflows and LLMs • Run locally with Docker; integrate via Web UI or API Build with more visibility:

JUST IN Grok 4.6 is the only model LatchBio tested that can refuse disguised bio threats and still do real science. • Only system above 50% on both bars • Refused 59.2% of disguised red-team / dangerous bio queries • Completed 64.8% of legitimate research tasks • Averaged 62.1% across harnesses (top three spots) • Pathogen surveillance 53.5%, behind Opus 5, ahead of GPT-5.6 Sol xAI: it “correctly detects and refuses dangerous queries, including maliciously obfuscated biological tasks,” without blocking beneficial science.

SpaceXAI just published a new blog post on biosecurity at the frontier An independent LatchBio evaluation put Grok 4.6 at the top for one of the hardest balances in biological AI: Refuse really dangerous requests While still helping with legitimate scientific work On BioSecBench-Refusal: • Grok 4.6 averaged 62.1% • Refused 59.2% of red-team biological tasks • Still completed 64.8% of routine biological work • The ONLY model tested to score above 50% on both And Grok is not just reacting to scary keywords The evaluation traces show it inspecting files, context and hidden intent to recognize when an apparently normal scientific task is actually dangerous That balance matters enormously AI should accelerate biology, medicine and outbreak monitoring without becoming useful for malicious biological work Grok 4.6 is getting significantly better at doing both: becoming more capable while also becoming better calibrated about where the boundaries are SpaceXAI is taking frontier AI safety very seriously

They just got their call signs. My Grok bot lineup: Dispatch runs the board. Scout watches the timeline. Red Team tries to break the take. Fool asks the question that isn't dumb. Team TechOperator.